Allahabad Court March 2012 Judgments

Smt. Rekha Devi Vs. Abhishek Misra

Court: Allahabad

Shabihul Hasnain, J. This is an appeal from order under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1957 read with Section 19 of the Family Court Act against the judgment and decree dated 25.7.2011 passed by the Additional District Judge, Room No. 1, District Sultanpur in Regular Case No. 687 of 2010 ( Smt. Rekha Devi vs. Abhishekh Misra) wherein the appeal has been dismissed. The appellant has prayed for setting aside the judgment and decree on a number of grounds but the main ground taken by the appellant is that the suit has been dismissed despite 'No objection' from the husband opposite party. The learned court below was of the opinion that suit for divorce could not have been allowed under the provision in which it was filed. The learned court below was of the view that on the grounds mentioned in the suit a decree on the basis of mutual consent could not have been issued. It was observed that for this purpose a regular suit under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act should have been i...

Piyush Kumar Vs. State of U.P. Thru' Secretary Lucknow and Others

Court: Allahabad

1. We have heard Sri Rohit Agarwal for the petitioner. Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla appears for the U.P. Power Corporation Ltd through Executive Engineer, Distribution Division, Bijnor. 2. The petitioner was a Director of the U.P. Lime Chem. Ltd – a public limited Company registered under the Companies Act 1956, with its registered office situated at Haridwar Road, Bijnor. 3. The Company entered into an agreement with the Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division-I Bijnor on 22.2.1990, for supply of 335 KVA electricity load. The agreement was signed by the petitioner as a director of Company. Clause 13 of the agreement provided that any notice by the supplier to the consumer shall be deemed to be duly given and served, if it is addressed to the consumer and delivered by hand at, or sent by registered post to the address specified in the consumer's application or as subsequently notified to the supplier. Clause 14 provides that consumer shall pay in advance an estimated amo...

Brij Mohan Vs. Peetam Singh

Court: Allahabad

Heard Sri Salil Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Vidya Bhushan Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. The appellant is challenging the order dated 29.03.2007 passed by Additional District Judge, Agra in Appeal No.36 of 2003 arising from the suit no.185 of 2002. The brief facts of the case are that a sale deed was executed by Phool Singh in favour of the appellant on 03.12.2001 and in pursuance thereof the possession has been given. The plaintiff/respondent filed a suit being suit no.185 of 2002 for the cancellation of the sale deed dated 03.12.2001 and sought further relief for the possession and damages. The trial court decreed the suit and cancelled the sale deed dated 03.12.2001 and directed the defendant to hand over the possession. Against the order of the trial court, the appeal has been dismissed. Hence the present second appeal. The case of the plaintiff was that he had purchased the suit property from Smt. Sarvati Devi against th...

Subhash Maini Vs. Nathi Ram and Another

Court: Allahabad

In the present appeal, the appellant is challenging the order dated 19.01.2012 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kairana, Muzaffarnagar, by which Civil Appeal No.101 of 2011 filed by the appellant and appeal no.98 of 2011 filed by Kareshan have been dismissed and the order of the trial court dated 17.08.2011 has been affirmed. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent nos.1 and 2 entered into an agreement to sell dated 21.07.2004 in respect of property in dispute. The respondent no.2 filed suit no.201 of 2004 for the cancellation of agreement to sell. The respondent no.1 filed suit no.35 of 2005 for specific performance. It appears that during the pendency of the aforesaid suits, the respondent no.2 has executed the sale deed of the property in dispute on 17.02.2006 in favour of the appellant. By impleadment application, the appellant has been impleaded as defendant no.2. Both the suits have been connected and decided by order dated 17.08.2011. The suit no.35 of 2...

Dhan Singh and Another Vs. State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2012CrLJ3156

Vinod Prasad, J. In these two connected appeals, a family consisting of father Dhan Singh (A-1), mother Smt. Makkhan (A-2) and their son Akhilesh Kumar (A-3), who were in-laws and husband of Geeta(deceased), have challenged their conviction under Section 304-B (2), 498A IPC and 4 D.P. Act and imposed sentences of ten years R.I. for the first charge, two years R.I. with Rs. 5000/- fine, on each of the appellants and in default of payment thereof to undergo three months simple imprisonment, for the second charge, and one year R.I. with fine of 2500/=, the default sentence being two months further R.I., for the last charge imposed by Additional Session’s Judge, court no.2, Jhansi in S.T. No.85 of 2004, State vs. Dhan Singh and others, relating to Police Station Baruwa Sagar, district Jhansi vide impugned judgement and order dated 23.3.2005. Charges against the appellants, as was levelled and scribed by the informant Gunchi Lal (P.W.1), father of the deceased Geeta, in his written F....

Balbir Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Sunil Hali, J. A partnership firm in the name and style of M/s Guru Govind Singh Rice Mills was constituted on 25.3.1975 consisting of petitioner and six others partners. The said partnership stood dissolved on 29.10.1984. Fresh partnership deed was executed by the petitioner with one of his ex-partner and three other partners of the dissolved firm in the name and style of M/s UP National and General Rice Mills. One of the partner died as a consequence of which the firm was dissolved. In this behalf a deed of dissolution was executed between the petitioner and four partners and legal heirs of the deceased person namely Sri Shyam Das. The deed of dissolution was executed on 20.9.2002 between four partners Sri Anokh Singh, Sri Darshan Singh, Sri Balveer Singh and Sri Rajesh Kumar and Sudesh Kumar and Ramesh Kumar, both sons of deceased Shyam Das. On account of dissolution of the firm Sri Anokh Singh and Sri Darshan Singh consequent upon the dissolution of firm received a sum of Rs. 1,80,...

Moti Lal Kushwaha Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2012(3)LLN158

1. In the present case, petitioner has rushed to this Court with request to quash the order dated 25.03.2011 issued by the Works Manager of the Irrigation Workshop Division, Naini, Allahabad, informing the petitioner that he would attain the age of superannuation on completing the age of 58 years. The facts of the case, as set out in the writ petition, are that the Irrigation Workshop Division, Naini, Allahabad is an industrial establishment in the Irrigation Department of the State Government, which is under the control and supervision of the Works Manager of the Irrigation Workshop Division, Naini, Allahabad. The petitioner was working continuously in the said workshop as Moulder since 01.01.1987 as daily wager. On 15.03.1991 the Chief Engineer, Procurement and Material Management, Irrigation Department, U.P. Lucknow sanctioned 93 posts in different trades, prescribing their pay scales, qualification and experience etc. Thereafter Selection Committee was constituted and the Superinte...

Ratna Shanker Dwivedi Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

1. The Stamp Act is a fiscal measure enacted with an object to secure revenue for the State on certain classes of instruments. It is not enacted to arm a litigant with a weapon of technicality to meet the case of his opponent. The stringent provisions of the Act are conceived in the interest of the revenue. Once that object is secured according to law, the party staking his claim on the instrument will not be defeated on the ground of initial defect in the instrument. The sole object of Stamp Act under its various provisions is to require the parties concerned to set forth correct market value of the property at which the transaction has taken place so that appropriate duty in accordance with the Act is paid by them to avoid large scale evasion of stamp duty. It also mandates that while setting forth the correct market value of the property in dispute the competent authority must not apply their mind in a fact fashion and in a haphazard way. 2. The facts shorn of details are that the p...

Anirudh Kumar Dwivedi and Another Vs. Principal Judge, Family Court an ...

Court: Allahabad

By means of this writ petition the petitioners have challenged the order of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Allahabad dated 9.11.2011. The brief facts of the case are that a marriage was solemnized between the petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 on 7.7.1997. Unfortunately, differences arose between them and a suit being Suit No. 181 fo 2009 for dissolution of marriage under Section 13 (1) (a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short the Act) was filed by the wife-petitioner no.2 before the Family Court, Allahabad, seeking dissolution of marriage on account of cruelty by the husband and constant demand of dowry. Simultaneously, other cases were also filed under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 and 509 IPC and also under Section 3/ 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The allegations and the counter allegations ensued and an FIR was also lodged against the husband-petitioner no.1, which led to filing of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR being Application No. 2...